The highest valid bidder should be considered for settlement, and acceptance of a tender other than the highest valid tenderer requires prior and formal approval of the government. The competitive bidding process must be fair, transparent, and non-discriminatory, adhering to statutory prescriptions.

JUDGMENT :

(Manish Choudhury, J.) : –

1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed an order dtd. 18/12/2021 passed by the respondent No. 4 i.e. the Chief Executive Officer, Darrang Zilla Parishad, whereby, the settling authority had settled a market viz. 'Tangni Weekly Animal Market' ['the Market', for short] in favour of the respondent No. 8 for the period from 25/12/2021 to 30/6/2022. While seeking setting aside of the impugned order dtd. 18/12/2021, the petitioner has also sought for a direction to the respondent authorities to grant settlement of the Market in favour of the petitioner.

2. By a Tender Notice dtd. 21/6/2021 published by the Pub Mangaldoi Anchalik Panchayat, Dhola, sealed bids were invited from interested bidders for settlement of a number of markets/ghats/fisheries falling within its jurisdiction for the Panchayat Financial Year: 2021-2022 and for the period from 1/7/2021 to 30/6/2022 as per the provisions of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, as amended. It was mentioned that the period of settlement would be effective from the date of finalization of the settlement of the bidding process. As per the Tender Notice, the last date of submission of bids was originally fixed up to 02-00 p.m., 5/8/2021. After publication of the Tender Notice on 21/6/2021, a litigation ensued before the Court of learned Munsiff No. II, Darrang and the bidding process came to be stalled by virtue of an interim order dtd. 3/8/2021 passed by the learned Court. Later on, the Court of learned Munsiff withdrew the interim order on 3/9/2021. Thereafter by a subsequent Notice dtd. 4/9/2021, the respondent No. 4 had intimated that the bidding process would recommence and the bids would be received up to 02-00 p.m., 20/9/2021 and the terms and conditions of the bidding process would remain the same as had been incorporated in the Tender Notice dtd. 21/6/2021. One of the markets which was sought to be settled by the Tender Notice dtd. 21/6/2021 and the Notice dtd. 4/9/2021 was Tangni Weekly Animal Market ['the Market'].

2.1. In the Tender Notice dtd. 21/6/2021, the annual Government value fixed for the Market was Rs.5, 69, 403.00 and the earnest money required to be deposited was Rs.56, 941.00.

2.2. In response to the Tender Notice, 10 Nos. of bidders including the petitioner and the respondent No. 8, had submitted their bids quoting different bid values. The names of the bidders including their bid values, in descending order, were as under:-

2.3. After receipt of the bids from the participating bidders, the General Standing Committee of the Anchalik Panchayat opened the bids of all the bidders. Thereafter, the General Standing Committee of the Anchalik Panchayat examined the tender papers and recorded their comments in respect of the bids in a comparative statement prepared for the purpose. The office of the Anchalik Panchayat forwarded the bid documents along with the comparative statement recording their comments at relevant places therein to the office of the Darrang Zilla Parishad in terms of the provisions of Sec. 109[6] of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994, as amended. After receipt of the tender papers along with the comparative statement, the General Standing Committee of the Zilla Parishad evaluated the bids and after such evaluation, the General Standing Committee of the Zilla Parishad vide Resolution No. 9 taken in its meeting held on 7/12/2021, decided to settle the Market in favour of the private respondent No. 8 at his quoted bid value. Accordingly, the impugned order of settlement was issued on 18/12/2021 in favour of the respondent No. 8 mentioning the proportionate amount of the settled bid value at Rs.4, 52, 250.00 for the settlement period from 25/12/2021 up to 30/6/2022.

3. Aggrieved by the order of settlement issued in favour of the respondent No. 8, the petitioner has approached this Court by this writ petition challenging the same on the grounds inter alia that the Mar